One, Two, Three

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

FINDING THE FIT. Shortly after announcing the discovery of a new extrasolar planet orbiting Upsilon Andromedae in 1997, the researchers became convinced that there was something missing in the picture. An analysis of 11 years of observations finally provided the answer: there is not one planet but three. Here is how computer modeling helped them pinpoint two more planets from their Doppler spectroscopy data.


SHORT-TERM PLOTS of the first planet orbiting Upsilon Andromedae, designated companion b, look conclusive. In any few months, the spectrographic data show it zipping around the planet every 4.6 Earth-days. But when the investigators looked at longer time periods, the data became "noisy." Suspecting that there might be another object in the system, the principal discoverers--Geoffrey W. Marcy of San Francisco State and R. Paul Butler of the Anglo-Australian Observatory--notified other astronomers.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.



SECOND TRY. The researchers then plugged 11 years of observations into a computer model to plot the characteristics of the system if it consisted of two planets. The data produced an imperfect fit, with many points falling outside the curve. Was there yet another object?


FINAL RESOLUTION. To determine if the odd data points were the signal of a third planet, the team ran a model for three planets. This time, almost all the points fit within the predicted curves.

By subtracting the data from any two of the curves, the researchers were able to obtain orbital plots for each of the three planets.


Images: San Francisco State University
Back to Significant Others

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe